Hisey et al v. Ellis et al

Filing 102

ORDER denying 99 Defendants Ellis and Innovative Data Search's Motion to Dismiss and denying 100 Second Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN) Modified on 1/3/2018 (DN). (cc to pltf at address)

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8

CALLI L. HISEY, et al.,

CASE NO. C17-5543RBL

9
Plaintiffs,
10
11

ORDER

v.
KELLY ELLIS, et al.,

12

Defendants.

13
14

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Ellis and Innovative Data Search

15

LLCs’ “Proposed Motion to Dismiss” [Dkt. #99], Second Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #100], and a

16

“Reply” to their attorneys’ motion to withdraw, which has already been granted. The latter

17

document suggests that Plaintiff Hisey has closed her law office and that Defendants cannot

18

locate her to discuss the case (it does not have anything to do with the attorney’s motion to

19

withdraw).

20
21
22
23

The Motions to dismiss are based on Defendants claim that it is Hisey who is the bully,
not them, and the bald claim that Hisey is lying to the Court and wasting its time.
Defendant Kelly can represent himself pro se, but he cannot represent Defendant
Innovative Data Search LLC. A corporation may appear in federal court only through licensed

24

ORDER - 1

1

counsel. See Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 202–03 (1993); Taylor v. Knapp, 871

2

F.2d 803, 806 (9th Cir. 1989).

3

The Motions to Dismiss are DENIED.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated this 3rd day of January, 2018.

7

A

8

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

6

9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

ORDER - 2